Showing posts with label democracy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label democracy. Show all posts

Friday, April 5, 2013

MY FAVORITE BLOG POSTS

by James Craig Green
 

I've been blogging about two years now.
 
Most of the following - my favorites - are about the government BEAST destroying America to the most resounding applause and PUBLIC praise:


Adam Smith's Dismal Science (Mar 2011):
http://libertyalumnidiscussions.blogspot.com/2011/03/adam-smiths-dismal-science.html
(MALTHUS' BLUNDER, Great Myths of the Great Depression and the illogic of a
century of overblown government regulation, while blaming markets)


Science = Deduction + Induction (May 2011):
http://libertyalumnidiscussions.blogspot.com/2011/05/science-induction-deduction.html
(Why SCIENCE can never be settled... please stay with it; you'll be rewarded)


Private Property, Public Plunder (May 2011)
http://libertyalumnidiscussions.blogspot.com/2013/04/private-property-public-plunder.html
(Private Property PRODUCES ALL the wealth that Government consumes and wastes)
 
 
The Problem With Democracy (Jun 2011):
http://libertyalumnidiscussions.blogspot.com/2011/06/democratic-family.html
(VOTERS in a Democracy overwhelm producers, like in the ROMAN EMPIRE and today's Post-Peaked WELFARE STATES)


DON KIRKLAND on The Gap Between Rich and Poor (Mar 2012):
http://libertyalumnidiscussions.blogspot.com/2012/03/gap-between-rich-and-poor-in-america.html  (Excellent Summary of GOVERNMENT-GONE-WILD by my Best Friend)


Junkie Nation (Dec 2012):
http://libertyalumnidiscussions.blogspot.com/2012/12/junkie-nation.html
(More on the WELFARE STATE and Government Junkies voting for a living)


How to Cook a Golden Goose (Jan 2013)
http://libertyalumnidiscussions.blogspot.com/2013/01/how-to-cook-golden-goose.html
(Crony Capitalism of the Welfare State; Bush & Obama = Hoover & Roosevelt)


THE LAW by Frederic Bastiat - highlights (Feb 2013):
http://libertyalumnidiscussions.blogspot.com/2013/02/the-law-excerpts.html
(THE BEST FREEDOM BOOK EVER - what Government should -- and should not do)


CONSENT of the Governed (Mar 2013):
http://libertyalumnidiscussions.blogspot.com/2013/03/consent-of-governed.html
(DEMOCRACY IS DESTROYING AMERICA - and the Founders' Limited Republic)

Friday, March 15, 2013

CONSENT OF THE GOVERNED

by James Craig Green


Fifteen years before the Bill of Rights was added to the U.S. Constitution in 1791, the foundation of the American Republic was built on the most radical idea in human history – that government exists to serve people - not the other way around. This idea was brilliantly stated in the Declaration of Independence on July 4th, 1776:

Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed

CONSENT OF THE GOVERNED are the four most important words in American History. Although other governments have paid lip service to the people, none has been formed from scratch, without the remnants of monarchy or other old tyrannies, based on this principle. Unfortunately, the principle of consent has been so widely confused and corrupted that today, it is no longer believed to be required by many Americans. This lack of explicit consent by citizens is one reason why government today is so large and invasive, regulating virtually every aspect of human behavior, as an abusive parent dominates his children.


America’s Forgotten Courage

On July 4th, 1776, a handful of brave men openly committed high treason to pledge - in their words ...our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor to the cause of liberty. The Declaration of Independence was the most important and unique political document in human history. It did not form a new government, but simply rejected an existing one. 56 Americans signed the Declaration of Independence. It is rumored that John Hancock, first to sign, used a large, sweeping script so King George III could read it …without his spectacles.

According to the Founders Almanac (Heritage Foundation, 2002), seventeen of the signers served in the military, five were captured by the British during the war, some were killed, several had to move their families repeatedly, many donated large sums of money never repaid and eleven had homes and property destroyed. THESE, my friends, were patriots - unlike the Red and Blue demagogues who pimp for your votes today.


Remnants of Liberty’s Past

American governments today promise to give their most favored citizens - and others - almost anything, for “free.” Of course, government largesse is not really free. Someone else has to pay for every dollar you receive from government – after it skims half for itself. Gullible voters continue to participate in the charade of political elections, in which candidates selected by powerful elites compete to see how much of other people's money (forced by threat of imprisonment) they can promise to their constituents, which now don't even have to be citizens. The most honest word for this is plunder.

Political elections pretend to demonstrate control of government by the people, but one vote in 60 million or so every few years is trivial compared to the daily influence that lobbyists and other power brokers have on legislators and other government officials. Government by the people today is actually government by special interests, whose private wants are sold to a gullible public as needs. All you have to do is say your private want is in the public interest, and politicians of every stripe will stampede to sponsor a bill in your behalf. The trouble is, this also works for every petty tyrant who wants to control every aspect of your life, or force you to pay for his failures. After an income tax was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in 1894, the Constitution was amended in 1913 to allow it (16th Amendment). 

 
The Big “D”
 
The word democracy comes from the Greek demos, meaning people, and kratien, meaning rule. Literally, democracy means people rule. Today, however, democracy is a smokescreen to perpetuate the false idea that citizens control government. To the chagrin of thinking and productive people everywhere, the most democratic governments in the world today are controlled by self-absorbed special interests, who successfully manipulate public servants into believing their selfish agendas are somehow in the public interest. As a card-carrying member of the American Communist Party told me in 1985, communists believe the PUBLIC should own the means of production. No clearer statement of the reality of modern politics in so-called democratic states was ever made. It is not citizens who control today’s governments, but lobbyists, who seduce your favorite politicians and their minions for the 364 days in the year you are NOT voting. The idea that pulling a lever in a voting booth once every two, four, or six years by one out of five people to elect a public servant is citizen control of government is preposterous. BUT, it is widely believed and promoted by those educated in government schools to conform, not think. 

 
It’s not democracy that creates prosperity, but freedom's productive commerce.
 
The false promises of democratic government today are prosperity without effort, freedom without responsibility and security without risk. America, the cradle of liberty, has become the most shining current example of lynch-mob collectives, led by dictatorial demagogues from the Roosevelts, to Nixon, to Obama. It was Republican President Nixon (my Commander-in-Chief) who unconstitutionally - without serious challenge - removed the last bit of gold backing from the dollar in 1971.
 
 
Galt's Gulch?

John Galt, the heroic figure in Ayn Rand’s novel “Atlas Shrugged,” figured the producers, workers and thinkers of the world could bring governments, tyrants and agencies to a halt by simply withholding their services. As America continues its destructive path of seemingly endless consumption while inhibiting production, this may soon be more realistic than you ever imagined.

Until Americans and other hard-working, independent and productive people of the world can legally say “NO!” to the funding of government, they will not be free, independent or “democratic.” In case you were educated in government schools like most of us, you may not realize that America's founding was not based on democracy, except for the House of Representatives. The Constitutional Republic founded in 1787, modified by its Bill of Rights in 1791, was a Republic, not a Democracy. This means government limited to certain listed powers granted to it by the sovereign people, who retain all rights not granted to government by the U.S. Constitution. This concept was lost long before your grandparents were born, though it is still right there, unchanged, in the Bill or Rights... especially Amendments IX (nine) and X (ten). Not one word of the Bill of Rights (first ten Amendments) has ever been changed.

Today, it is the height of arrogance, duplicity and insanity that the President and every member of Congress, plus all other federal and state officials, take an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution, while they implement unconstitutional programs faster than ever before. It would be funny, if it were not so ironic - and tragic.

As the unfunded liabilities of the federal government continue to bankrupt it, the Founding Fathers' vision of the American Republic has been almost completely lost. About 40% of every dollar spent by the federal government today is borrowed. America transformed itself from the world's largest creditor, to the world's largest debtor, in a few decades.

Only by returning to government with limited powers focused on protecting its citizens instead of plundering them, will the productive spirit of the American Revolution return to its rightful place in history... and posterity. Until then, the worst among us will continue to abuse the U.S. Constitution, produce more and more unconstitutional laws, ignore the rule of law and continue America's century-long march down the road to fascism, toward its cousin socialism.

In 1850, one of my favorite freedom thinkers in history - Frenchman Frederic Bastiat, published a little book called THE LAW. I have said many times, and continue to believe - that American government today is hopelessly corrupt, violent and oppressive, because it has lost the original vision of its Founders.

I hope you will read THE LAW to better understand the point at which a government - like the one begun in America more than two centuries ago - goes beyond its legitimate purpose (to protect people and property), to turn precious liberty into tyranny, as it has today. This happens once the government and a minority of its citizens discover that it is cheaper and easier to petition government for special favors (Always at the expense of others by force), instead of promoting policies that either benefit all, or are left to the private sector which produces ALL wealth.
 

“Make government what it ought to be, and it will support itself.”
-Thomas Paine

 

Sunday, January 13, 2013

THE LAW by FREDERIC BASTIAT


by James Craig Green


I cannot overemphasize the importance of Frederic Bastiat's elegant masterpiece THE LAW. Published in 1850 - the year of his death, it was the most powerful critique of Karl Marx's COMMUNIST MANIFESTO, published two years before (1848).

Marx's Manifesto was primarily a critique of European monarchies - which deserved to be criticized - but went much too far down the road of collectivism, which has been, arguably, the most successful political philosophy of the last two centuries. I argue strenuously that this "success" in the minds of too many Americans today came at the cost of freedom and individual rights - the tenets of the founders' American Republic. The intoxicating promises of Marx' utopian vision for the future of Europe were compelling ideas at a time of the radical political reforms which still dominate American universities - and our society - today. Little did he know it would flourish first in Russia - not Western Europe.

Even after the collapse of the Soviet Union - the ultimate expression of Marxism - today's western democracies still cling to the dangerous and destructive ideas of Marx' philosophy. What most Americans don't know is the Soviet Union collapsed economically in the 1920's, to be saved by American industrialists like Armand Hammer.

Today, American government continues to be corrupted by Marxian ideas, including the further expansion of the welfare state (now bankrupting America), a powerful central bank that has destroyed the dollar by a century of inflation, and most importantly - the idea that democratic government is the ultimate, and best, form of government.

It was the rejection of democracy that drove the American founders' ideals. 

A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine. - Thomas Jefferson

See: THE PROBLEM WITH DEMOCRACY


I sincerely hope serious students of history, philosophy and government will read both Bastiat's THE LAW and Marx' COMMUNIST MANIFESTO - to contrast their fundamental tenets. Marx' manifesto, of course, was the driving force behind failed socialist states around the world like the Soviet Union, North Korea, Cuba and many South American banana "republics." Today's Communist China would have likely already collapsed were it not for capitalist reforms to limit the damage, including taking back capitalist Hong Kong in 1997, to generate profitable capitalist trade for China. Most western democracies today are mixed economies, as much fascist as socialist. By allowing private property to exist - heavily regulated to provide a productive cash cow - modern democratic states such as the US are still blind to the long term dangers of TRILLIONS of dollars of public debt and the apparent growth of governments which are collapsing everywhere we look - even in US cities like Detroit, Chicago and Washington D.C. The American - and World - economies cannot continue their Soviet-like policies without the most severe long term consequences.

There is NO contradiction between Marxism and Democracy (Marx' COMMUNIST MANIFESTO promoted winning the battle of democracy). BOTH are forms of collectivism - the idea that the individual is subordinate to the will of the mob (politely called the majority). This was the unfortunate legacy of the French Revolution, in which the collective was supreme over the indiviual. This led to the Reign of Terror, the Guillotine and finally, the Emperor Napoleon. This is contrasted to the American Revolution, whose elegant Declaration of Independence, Constitution and the Bill of Rights exalted the rights of individuals above that of lynch mobs, monarchies and yes, democracies - which had always been tried and had always failed.

See: MADISONS CRITIQUE OF DEMOCRACY


THE ESSENCE

The primary focus of Bastiat's THE LAW is recognition of John Locke's individual rights of life, liberty and property - the complete opposite of Marx' failed collectivism. The success of the American Revolution was its recognition of INDIVIDUAL rights as being superior to collective rights. Bastiat recognized these individual rights as necessary precursors to these fraudulent "collective rights" depending on plunder, rather than production. As socialist states around the world have repeatedly discovered... without private property, there is soon no wealth to redistribute.

See:  THE LAW online.

Following are excerpts from Bastiat's masterpiece which I hope will motivate you into reading this short book, and other brilliant economic works by Bastiat (Economic Sophisms, Petition of Candlemakers, etc). The best current version of THE LAW of which I am aware is published by LAISSEZ FAIRE BOOKS. If you like this little 5 dollar book as much as I do, why not purchase copies to hand out to your friends?


EXCERPTS FROM:

The Law
Frédéric Bastiat
(1801-1850)


The law perverted! And the police powers of the state perverted along with it! The law, I say, not only turned from its proper purpose but made to follow an entirely contrary purpose! The law become the weapon of every kind of greed! Instead of checking crime, the law itself guilty of the evils it is supposed to punish!

If this is true, it is a serious fact, and moral duty requires me to call the attention of my fellow-citizens to it.


What, then, is law? It is the collective organization of the individual right to lawful defense.

Each of us has a natural right — from God — to defend his person, his liberty, and his property. These are the three basic requirements of life, and the preservation of any one of them is completely dependent upon the preservation of the other two. For what are our faculties but the extension of our individuality? And what is property but an extension of our faculties? If every person has the right to defend even by force — his person, his liberty, and his property, then it follows that a group of men have the right to organize and support a common force to protect these rights constantly. Thus the principle of collective right — its reason for existing, its lawfulness — is based on individual right. And the common force that protects this collective right cannot logically have any other purpose or any other mission than that for which it acts as a substitute. Thus, since an individual cannot lawfully use force against the person, liberty, or property of another individual, then the common force — for the same reason — cannot lawfully be used to destroy the person, liberty, or property of individuals or groups.

Such a perversion of force would be, in both cases, contrary to our premise. Force has been given to us to defend our own individual rights. Who will dare to say that force has been given to us to destroy the equal rights of our brothers? Since no individual acting separately can lawfully use force to destroy the rights of others, does it not logically follow that the same principle also applies to the common force that is nothing more than the organized combination of the individual forces?

If this is true, then nothing can be more evident than this: The law is the organization of the natural right of lawful defense. It is the substitution of a common force for individual forces. And this common force is to do only what the individual forces have a natural and lawful right to do: to protect persons, liberties, and properties; to maintain the right of each, and to cause justice to reign over us all.


A Just and Enduring Government

If a nation were founded on this basis, it seems to me that order would prevail among the people, in thought as well as in deed. It seems to me that such a nation would have the most simple, easy to accept, economical, limited, non-oppressive, just, and enduring government imaginable — whatever its political form might be.

Under such an administration, everyone would understand that he possessed all the privileges as well as all the responsibilities of his existence. No one would have any argument with government, provided that his person was respected, his labor was free, and the fruits of his labor were protected against all unjust attack. When successful, we would not have to thank the state for our success. And, conversely, when unsuccessful, we would no more think of blaming the state for our misfortune than would the farmers blame the state because of hail or frost. The state would be felt only by the invaluable blessings of safety provided by this concept of government.

It can be further stated that, thanks to the non-intervention of the state in private affairs, our wants and their satisfactions would develop themselves in a logical manner. We would not see poor families seeking literary instruction before they have bread. We would not see cities populated at the expense of rural districts, nor rural districts at the expense of cities. We would not see the great displacements of capital, labor, and population that are caused by legislative decisions.

The sources of our existence are made uncertain and precarious by these state-created displacements. And, furthermore, these acts burden the government with increased responsibilities.
 

The Complete Perversion of the Law

But, unfortunately, law by no means confines itself to its proper functions. And when it has exceeded its proper functions, it has not done so merely in some inconsequential and debatable matters. The law has gone further than this; it has acted in direct opposition to its own purpose. The law has been used to destroy its own objective: It has been applied to annihilating the justice that it was supposed to maintain; to limiting and destroying rights which its real purpose was to respect. The law has placed the collective force at the disposal of the unscrupulous who wish, without risk, to exploit the person, liberty, and property of others. It has converted plunder into a right, in order to protect plunder. And it has converted lawful defense into a crime, in order to punish lawful defense.

How has this perversion of the law been accomplished? And what have been the results?
 

Perverted Law Causes Conflict

As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose — that it may violate property instead of protecting it — then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious. To know this, it is hardly necessary to examine what transpires in the French and English legislatures; merely to understand the issue is to know the answer.

Is there any need to offer proof that this odious perversion of the law is a perpetual source of hatred and discord; that it tends to destroy society itself? If such proof is needed, look at the United States [in 1850]. There is no country in the world where the law is kept more within its proper domain: the protection of every person's liberty and property. As a consequence of this, there appears to be no country in the world where the social order rests on a firmer foundation. But even in the United States, there are two issues — and only two — that have always endangered the public peace: stupid greed and false philanthropy...


 

Wednesday, November 21, 2012

THE PROBLEM WITH GOVERNMENT

Revised 12-8-2012

by James Craig Green


“Government is the great fiction through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else.” – Frederic Bastiat

Throughout history, governments of the world have often ruled their citizens with an iron hand, using plunder, extortion and every conceivable kind of murder to keep them in line. Apparently, millions of people today think that “democratic” governments, in which a minority of citizens is allowed to vote for a few government “leaders,” have grown beyond the obvious and destructive tyranny that characterized monarchies and other forms of totalitarian dictatorship in the past.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

SEE: THE TRAGEDY OF AMERICAN DEMOCRACY

Just about everybody, at one time or another, complains about government. But, almost no one understands what the REAL problem with all government is, and why, on balance, government always creates more (and worse) problems than it solves. This can never be changed by politics - the ongoing charade that people are in control of those who enslave them.

The main problem with government is that it is based on aggressive force - like the Mafia - except the Mafia doesn’t pretend to represent everyone, least of all the majority who never gave its consent to be governed. Today's governments are world champions of plunder, extortion, and destruction (PED). As legal organized crime, government makes the Mafia look like amateurs by comparison. Sadly, too many believe that because a handful of government officials are elected “democratically,” their plunder, extortion and destruction are excused, or at least necessary. The most common - and fraudulent - phrase to convey these excuses is the “Public Interest.”

The “Public Interest” is the magic phrase, like “Open Sesame,” that allows virtually anyone in a democracy to become a special interest, supposedly deserving of some freebie from the government at the expense of everyone else. Anyone can run to a legislator, with a self-interested proposition disguised to be in the “public interest,” to easily inflict any manner of tyranny on his fellow citizens. This often includes government subsidies to business (promoted by chambers of commerce, government contractors and unions). These special interests, who are "more equal than others," enjoy government benefits and the ability to influence and regulate the nonviolent lifestyles of others and inflict their prohibition of anything they deem to be offensive.

Multiple election frauds recently committed by Obamites in blue states are Exhibit A. When 5-8 percent more votes are cast than registered voters in some precincts, and you hear nothing on the national news... you can be pretty sure the American Republic is dead.


The second biggest problem with government (arguably for some, the first) is that it bestows billions of dollars of benefits on people who do not deserve them. No one who receives or is assigned to allocate money, property or other resources belonging to others will ever spend that money as carefully or as thoughtfully as those who earn it or benefit from its investment. If your investment broker constantly skims money from your account, without higher gains, you can fire him by switching investment companies. But with government, your complaints will put you on lists with terrorists and other criminals, as a danger to the state. Bureaucrats who lose, malinvest or waste taxpayers' money almost never lose their jobs. Such waste is too often a recipe for increased taxpayer funding next year. So, the perverse incentive is to continue it, with little risk to the incompetents, thieves and parasites who maintain the fraudulent idea of "public service." 

Because it is based on PED, government cannot act responsibly with other people’s money. I didn’t say will not, may not, would not or should not - I said CANNOT. This is because it pretends to represent them, when only a small minority of them voted for the political winners in the electoral charade. In other words, a majority of citizens is never directly represented... at least not at the national level, where dollars are printed with abandon to keep incumbents in office.

SEE: THE PROBLEM WITH DEMOCRACY

Neither can anyone else represent such a diverse collective, but there are practical limits on private abuses that don’t apply to government. The lack of real, practical limits on government power, abuse of that power, corruption, fraud and tyranny all derive from one simple, undeniable fact:

GOVERNMENT IS FUNDED - AND ITS RULES IMPLEMENTED - BY FORCE

Worst of all, this legalized theft and tyranny is condoned, justified, apologized for and patriotically promoted by the vast majority of people who have been brainwashed into believing that government, on balance, produces positive benefits in the creation of wealth.

It doesn’t - and never has.

It has always been a drain on society, for a privileged few. Modern democracies have simply replaced the divine right of kings with the divine right of mobs, where your neighbors can become tyrants with enough savvy manipulation of the system. No one voted for the vast armies of unelected bureaucrats who enjoy guaranteed lifetime jobs and generous pensions at the expense of the taxpayer. Nor, can they be fired for incompetence or sloth in most cases.

Government appears to produce "freebies" without any (or little) cost, because their true costs are hidden and confused - jumbled up within a labyrinth of laws, regulations, promises and misunderstandings. We’ve all read and listened to media reports how reducing taxes hurts people, and how raising taxes produces all kinds of benefits. For business to operate this way, only gross revenues - but no costs - would be reported to shareholders and the public. This is normally called fraud, but not when done by government.

It is incredible and outrageous that so many people buy these stupid, erroneous, one-sided arguments, promoted constantly by government apologists everywhere. Perhaps the most confusing thing is that the most vocal of “anti-government” Republicans are not anti-government at all, as they usually benefit directly from ever-growing sums of government money. George Orwell (author of “1984" and “Animal Farm”), if he were alive to describe all this, might say something like, “Theft is freedom, taxes are profit and war is good for your children.” Of course, any politician who wants to get elected today must speak in such gibberish, so as to attract the maximum number of unthinking voters to his cause or candidacy.

Government always makes promises it can’t keep, as the political process demands it. The intoxication of lifetime benefits from taxpayers encourages legislators to promise things people want, while pretending it can produce the money to pay for such things without net cost, effort or loss. The myth of government is its naive perception as an endless wealth machine, which it is not. On the contrary, government in every society or country is the greatest enemy of its own people and the largest drain on their national wealth. But, because there are so many government programs offering freebies at the expense of freedom, a nation of junkies continues to allow - and even encourage it.

SEE: WHO BENEFITS AND PAYS FOR GOVERNMENT?

Today, the U.S. government chases its citizens to tax them all over the world, no matter in which country they make money or reside. However, other countries tax their citizens only for income made in those countries. This produces the worst of all worlds for the U.S. taxpayer - foreign visitors can make money here without being taxed by the U.S., but U.S. citizens cannot enjoy the same benefit for money made overseas. Some smart businessmen realize it may be better to become a citizen of another country, and just visit to do business in the U.S.

Ironically, the U.S. is a great tax haven for everyone but Americans! This is why raising taxes on rich Americans can never produce more than about 20-22 percent of GDP - and even then only for short periods. The rich can simply leave, retire or donate large portions of their wealth to charity instead of letting it be confiscated by government. This is why the maximum income tax rate in the year I was born (1945) was 94% and is now 35% - without materially affecting average revenue at 19% of GDP - as shown in the graphic below.


                   (CLICK GRAPH TO ENLARGE)



The rich have too many options, and are too smart to let government confiscate their wealth - which they can accomplish LEGALLY in most cases. The law has aways favored the wealthy - especially in the modern welfare state, which has always protected them first. The poor are driven into dependency, sloth and depression by fraudulent government promises of prosperity without effort. This magical thinking has produced generations of victims who chose the easy way out, which turns out to be the worst thing for them. Many will not survive the next, most severe economic downturn, which is now inevitable.

Just about anyone can be bought by government by throwing freebies at them, at taxpayer’s expense, and here’s the juicy part: you will not go to jail for accepting the government’s gifts to you. However, refuse to pay for someone else’s freebies, and you instantly become an enemy of the state, deserving all its criticism and brutality.

Sadly, the U.S. Constitution - elegantly designed to prevent the democratic free-for-all of American government that exists today - has been neutered, like an obnoxious dog, so it is no longer effective in protecting any minority, especially the individual, from the mob. The uncontrollable democratic tyranny of majority rule has replaced the limited Republic of James Madison, and is destroying the America we have known and loved with the dangerous narcotics of government freebies, dependency and public debt which have long passed sustainable levels.

SEE: UNCHAIN BUILDERS - MADISON  

Ironically, today’s neoliberals sell their brand of tyranny through the mantra of an ever-expanding welfare state. Just as ironic, today’s neoconservatives fight for every scrap of government handouts they can get, as everyone knows government is the very best client for business. It appears to have a stabilizing influence over the risky ventures of the marketplace, because it commands people to do things they would not voluntarily choose to do. This seems like a good idea when talking about controlling axe murderers and child molesters, but generations of government-educated idiots continue to promote the fantasy that government can produce prosperity or a net gain without effort. All it “produces” is hidden taxes, inflation and escalating debt that is, and will continue to be, foisted on our children, grandchildren and their descendents - until corrected by economic collapse.

Of course the collapse, as usual, will again be blamed on Laissez-Faire Capitalism - something absent from the U.S.for more than a lifetime.

SEE: CONFUSION ABOUT RIGHTS 

If neoliberals really believed their mantras, they would pass a law raising the minimum wage to one million dollars per year for everyone. However, if stated this bluntly, no one would take them seriously. Few seem to realize that the same silly logic and extreme consequences from this minimum wage law are the same as for current, more modest proposals. Only the numbers are different, while the poor and uneducated suffer from the unintended consequence of not qualifying for work because their skills are not worth the minimum wage. Of course, union members have long since used the minimum wage - which does not affect them - as a means of reducing competition for their labor.

I notice the spelling checker in this program has the word “neoconservative” in its database, but does not recognize the word “neoliberal.” How revealing: Too many folks seem to think that wonderful Latin word for freedom ("libertas") somehow still represents what the modern liberal wants, instead of the tyrannical democratic socialist welfare state s/he clamors for with every breath. No amount of government is too much government for a neoliberal. Tragically, neoconservatives are only slightly less tyrannical in their outlook, choosing corporate welfare instead of welfare to the poor. Both are destructive. Neoconservatives fall way behind neoliberals when it comes to personal freedom and alternative lifestyles that offend them, however. The ongoing destruction of the American Republic is big business for those politically connected, at the expense of others. After Roosevelt but before Obama, Republicans grew government faster than Democrats, as shown by the graphic below, which I researched and published in 2009:

                            (CLICK GRAPH TO ENLARGE)
 

Today of course, U.S. government debt exceeds $16 trillion, with ANNUAL deficits exceeding a trillion dollars in each of the last four years. Apparently, Obama's 2008 campaign promise to cut deficits in half was a joke, as they increased by more than half.

   
"Law cannot organize labor and industry without organizing injustice."
Frederic Bastiat

If neoconservatives really believed their bluster, they would immediately demand that the federal government be cut back to its constitutional limits. But wait! That would eliminate their sweet deals as government contractors – selling lots of overpriced, worthless stuff to governments who don’t have to worry about how to pay for it (since the Fed can just print more dollars). The irony of all ironies is that conservatives still fancy themselves as believing in free markets, which they haven't since long before President Roosevelt was elected in 1933. When bloated military budgets are called “defense” when their true purpose is war, and by subsidizing tyrants of every persuasion, anyone with a clear head would break down hysterically laughing, if the consequences of this stupidity were not so tragic. Egypt and Syria, of course - beneficiaries of billions of dollars in U.S. freebies - are such good friends to the U.S. that they contributed Osama Bin Laden and his insane terrorists who flew planes into buildings on 9/11/2001.  

There is nothing remotely related to freedom in any liberal or conservative political agenda today. Both groups of headless horsemen congratulate themselves on being in “control” of government, while deluding themselves into believing they will somehow be protected from the angry mob when the freebies stop flowing.

With record levels and escalating rates of public and private debt, it’s only a matter of time before the system of national government we know in the U.S. self destructs. If the poor think they are in bad shape today, wait until the freebies dry up.

Many otherwise reasonable people in democratic countries (like today's U.S.) sincerely believe that government produces positive good, and at worse is a necessary evil. This is because the benefits of government freebies appear obvious to all who can see them, but the costs are hidden or assigned to some other entity. For example, in 1913, the U.S. Congress created the Federal Reserve, a private banking cartel, and bestowed on it Congress’s constitutional power to regulate the nation’s money supply. This, and the creation of the income tax (previously declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court) in the same year financed the U.S. to enter World War I, which had been fought to a stalemate by all sides. If ever there was a stupid war, it was World War I, the results of which almost demanded the rise of a dictator like Hitler to produce World War II, plus an oppressive welfare/warfare state thereafter.

The rest, as they say, is history...


"Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys" - P.J. O'Rourke
 

Monday, April 16, 2012

THE TRAGEDY OF AMERICAN DEMOCRACY

by James Craig Green


The tragedy of American Democracy is that the founding fathers rejected it more than 200 years ago for good reasons, but "the people" and their favorite self-serving politicians cheerfully brought it back.

For two decades now, I have written about how fundamentally different the American Revolution was from the French Revolution. America was founded on limited government, individual freedom and respect for individual rights. The French Revolution was founded on almost pure democracy, which led to the Guillotine, the Reign of Terror and finally, the emperor Napoleon. "Collective rights" are no rights at all, because the majority can outvote any individual. The Soviet Union, Communist China and the Cuba of Fidel Castro are what you get when collective rights are enshrined into law as superior to individual rights.

As I discussed in April 2011's post UNCHAIN THE BUILDERS 4, the American Republic was NOT based on democracy, but has unfortunately devolved into one. It took more than 200 years of corrupting history, but now the U.S. has become a democracy, since there are more people who are net takers from government than net payers, as I explained in THE PROBLEM WITH DEMOCRACY (June 2011).

Thomas Jefferson, who was in France at the time the U.S. Constitution was being created, understood as well as his fellow Virginian James Madison, the dangers of democracy:

A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine

The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not

once the people become inattentive to the public affairs, you and I, and Congress and Assemblies, Judges and Governors, shall all become wolves

Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms (of government) those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny

Democracy may be the most addicting - and most destructive - narcotic ever invented. It allows people who contribute nothing to dominate those who produce everything. This is why at least since 2004 (according to the Tax Foundation), the majority of Americans vote for a living, as I explained in May 2011's  WHO BENEFITS AND WHO PAYS FOR GOVERNMENT?. The 2007 Tax Foundation study described there, based on tax and spending data for all levels of government ending in 2004, shows how three-fifths of Americans receive more than they contribute to American government. This is pure democracy in action, as Thomas Jefferson perceptively warned against at the beginning of the American Republic more than two centuries ago.

As I have stated many times, the best example of a democracy is a lynch mob - only one dissenting vote.

Have you ever wondered why America's Founders REJECTED democracy in the Presidency and the Senate, but only allowed it in the House of Representatives? One brilliant insight into this question was provided by James Madison, drafter of the Constitution and Bill of Rights, and fourth President of the United States. In  FEDERALIST NO. 10 , Madison clearly explained, as he called it, the "mischiefs of faction." By this term, he meant majorities tyrannizing minorities. This was precisely why he recommended a democratic House of Representatives, but NOT a democratic Senate, nor a democratically-elected President. Each of these were supposed to be immune to the majoritarian passions of the mob. Unfortunately, the Senate's structure was converted to a democratic form in 1913, with the 17th Amendment to the Constitution. The rejection of direct democracy by the founders was also exhibited in the Electoral College which elects the President.

To say American Government was founded on democracy is one of the most damaging but widespread myths about the federal government. Of the three branches of the federal government:

1. Legislative (Congress, consisting of the House and Senate)
2. Executive (The President, chosen by the electoral college), and
3. Judicial (Supreme Court, appointed by the President, ratified by the Senate),

...only one half of one branch was created as a democracy. Arguably, this may be thought of as only one-sixth of the federal government as the founders' originally intended it to be.

Democracy-Gone-Wild

Today, the mob is in control of everything. Since at least 2004 (shown by the Tax Foundation study), more people receive net benefits from government than they contribute. This was what Jefferson meant by his famous quoted above... The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.

Democracy is destroying America, because those who, on balance, produce useful goods and services can have their income, production and assets stolen by those who don't. By on balance, I mean that the majority who receives more from government than it contributes, as explained in WHO BENEFITS AND WHO PAYS FOR GOVERNMENT, has no incentive to cut government spending. This is destroying America from within. The best current proof of this is annual budget deficits for the federal government that exceed ONE AND ONE HALF TRILLION DOLLARS. That's EVERY year, not a lump sum over several years. This is called Bankruptcy elsewhere, but to the feds and their large contingent of dependents (most Americans), such language is considered impolite at least, and treasonous at worst.

American government has accrued AT LEAST 50 TRILLION DOLLARS of public debt in our lifetimes, with Republicans, Democrats and those who voted for them directly to blame. Since only about one-out-of-five Americans elect the President and Congress, the 80 percent who don't continue to be screwed at an alarming rate. I should note that the 50 TRILLION DOLLAR figure is a low estimate, generated by former Comptroller General of the U.S. David Walker. A much higher estimate of 120 TRILLION DOLLARS, published by the Cato Institute, reflects even more insanity by U.S. Governments and their most ardent supporters.

We should be ashamed of ourselves for letting it get this bad...

Monday, April 2, 2012

MENCKEN ON DEMOCRACY

NOTES ON DEMOCRACY
By H.L. Mencken (1926)

(exerpts below chosen by J. Craig Green)

Section 1 (Democratic Man), Chapter 1 (His Appearance in this World)


Democracy came into the Western World to the tune of sweet, soft music. There was, at the start, no harsh bawling from below; there was only a dulcet twittering from above.

Democratic man thus began as an ideal being, full of ineffable virtues and romantic wrongs – in brief, as Rousseau’s noble savage in smock and jerkin, brought out of the tropical wilds to shame the lords and masters of the civilized lands. The fact continues to have important consequences to this day. It remains impossible, as it was in the Eighteenth Century, to separate the democratic idea from the theory that there is a
mystical merit, an esoteric and ineradicable rectitude, in the man at the bottom of the scale – that inferiority, by some magic, by some strange magic, becomes a superiority – nay the superiority of superiorities. Everywhere on earth… the movement is toward a more completer and more enamoured enfranchisement of the lower orders.

Down there, one hears, lies a deep, illimitable reservoir of righteousness and wisdom, unpolluted from the corruption of privilege. What baffles statesmen is to be solved by the people, instantly and by a sort of seraphic intuition. Their yearnings are pure; they alone are capable of a perfect patriotism; in them is the only hope of peace and happiness on this lugubrious ball. The cure for the evils of democracy is more democracy!

This notion, as I hint, originated in the poetic fancy of gentlemen of the upper levels – sentimentalists who, observing to their distress that the ass was over-laden, proposed to reform transport by putting him in the cart…

Early Democratic man seems to have given little thought to the democratic ideal, and less veneration. What he wanted was something concrete and highly materialistic – more to eat, less work, higher wages, less taxes… His aim was not to exterminate the Baron, but simply to bring the baron back to a proper discharge of his baronial business. When, by the wild shooting that naturally accompanies all mob movements, the former end was accidentally accomplished, and men in the mob began to take on baronial airs, the mob itself quickly showed its opinion of them by butchering them deliberately and in earnest… (Mencken discusses the French Revolution,1828 America and Marx here).

…The dictatorship of the proletariat, tried here and there, has turned out to be – if I may venture a prejudicial judgment – somewhat impractical. Even the most advanced Liberals, observing the thing in being, have been moved to cough softly in their hands.

But it would certainly be going beyond the facts to say that the underlying democratic dogma has been abandoned, or even appreciably overhauled… The central aim of all the Christian governments of today, in theory if not in fact, is to further their liberation, to augment their power, to drive ever larger and larger pipes into the reservoir of their natural wisdom. That government is called good which responds most quickly and accurately to their desires and ideas. That is called bad which conditions their omnipotence and puts a question mark on their omniscience.



Purchase "Notes on Democracy" by Mencken

Wikipedia article on Mencken

Saturday, February 11, 2012

WHY FACEBOOK WORKS, AND DEMOCRACY DOES NOT

Introduction by James Craig Green

Friday's article by Jeffrey Tucker of the Mises Institute summarizes my entire belief system which has evolved over the last three decades. Actually, it extends back several years earlier, to the mid-seventies, with my complete frustration and discontent with government, politics and the insanely destructive nature of their coercive law.

Listed below is the best article I have read in many, many years. It explains why government is so destructive because of its anti-freedom democratic process. As I have written extensively elsewhere, it also explains why government as we know it is unsustainable, non-representative and inherently destructive. I have made this point in several of my blog posts over the last year or so, including the following from May 2011:


PRIVATE PROPERTY PUBLIC PLUNDER

MARKETS WORK - GOVERNMENTS DON'T

WHO BENEFITS AND WHO PAYS FOR GOVERNMENT?


I wish I had written the article below, because it summarizes my entire belief system when it comes to government, politics, markets, and above all - FREEDOM - which all governments want to destroy.

James Craig Green


****************
WHY FACEBOOK WORKS, AND DEMOCRACY DOES NOT

Whiskey & Gunpowder
by Jeffrey Tucker
February 10, 2012
Auburn, Alabama, U.S.A.


This year, Facebook will reach 1 billion users -- or one-seventh of the human population. It has elicited more participation than any single government in the world other than India and China, and it will probably surpass them in a year or two. And whereas many people are fleeing their governments as they are able, more and more people are joining Facebook voluntarily.

What is the logic, the driving force, the agent of change?

Yes, the software works fine, and yes, the managers and owners have entrepreneurial minds. But the real secret to Facebook is its internal human gears -- the individual users -- which turn out to mirror the way society itself forms and develops.

The best way to see and understand this is to compare the workings of Facebook with the workings of the democratic political process. Watching Facebook's development has been fun, productive, fascinating, useful and progressive. The election season, in contrast, has been divisive, burdensome, wasteful, acrimonious and wholly confusing.

That's because Facebook and democracy work on entirely different principles.

Facebook is based on the principle of free association. You join or decline to join. You can have one friend or thousands. It is up to you. You share the information you want to share and keep other things from public view. You use the platform only to your advantage while declining to use it for some other purpose.

The contribution you make on Facebook extends from the things you know best: yourself, your interests, your activities, your ideas. The principle of individualism -- you are the best manager of your life -- is the gear that moves the machine. Just as no two people are alike, no two people have the same experience with the platform. All things are customized according to your interests and desires.

But of course, you are interested in others too, so you ask for a connection. If they agree, you link up and form something mutually satisfying. You choose to include and exclude, gradually forming your own unique community based on any selection criteria you want. The networks grow and grow from these principles of individualism and choice. It is a constantly evolving, cooperative process -- exactly the one that Hans-Hermann Hoppe describes as the basis of society itself.

Democratic elections seem to be about choice in some way, but it is a choice over who will rule the whole mob. It provides the same user experience for everyone, regardless of individual desire. You are forced into the system by virtue of having been born into it. Sure, you can choose to vote, but you can't choose whether to be ruled by the voting results.

In this democratic system, you are automatically given 220 million "friends" whether you like it or not. These fake "friends" are given to you because of a geographic boundary drawn by government leaders long ago. These "friends" are posting on your wall constantly. Your news feed is relentless series of demands. You cannot delete their posts or mark them as spam. Revenue is not extracted from advertising but collected as you use the system.

Nothing is truly voluntary in an election. You are bound by the results regardless. This creates absurdities. This is incredibly apparent in the Republican nominating process. If people under 30 prevailed, Ron Paul would win. If religious families with several kids prevailed, Rick Santorum would win. If chamber of commerce members prevailed, Mitt Romney would be victor. It all comes down to demographics, but there can be only one winner under this system.

Therefore, an election must be a struggle between people, a fight, a wrangling around, a push to assert your will and overcome the interests and desires of others. In the end, we are assured that no matter the outcome, we should be happy because we all participated. The individual must give way to the collective.

We are told that this means that the system worked. But in what sense does it work? It only means that the well-organized minority prevailed over the diffused majority. This is about as peaceful as the kid's game "king of the mountain."

Facebook has nothing to do with this nonsense. Your communities are your own creation, an extension of your will and its harmony with the will of others. The communities grow based on the principle of mutual advantage. If you make a mistake, you can undisplay your friend's posts or you can unfriend him. This hurts feelings, sure, but it is not violent: It doesn't loot or kill.

Your friends in Facebook can be from anywhere. They "check in" and plot their journeys. Whether your friend lives in or moves to Beijing or Buenos Aires doesn't matter. Facebook makes possible what we might call geographically noncontiguous human associations. Language differences can be barriers to communication, but even they can be overcome.

Democracy is hyperbound by geography. You vote in an assigned spot. Your vote is assembled together with those of others in your county to produce a single result, and therefore, your actual wishes are instantly merged. They are merged again at another geographic level, and then at the state level and, finally, at the national level. By that time, your own preferences are vaporized.

Sometimes people get sick of Facebook. They suddenly find it tedious, childish, time wasting, even invasive. Fine. You can bail out. Go to your system preferences and turn off all notifications and take a sabbatical. People might complain, but it is your choice to be there or not. You can even delete your account entirely with no real downside. Then you can sign up again later if you so desire or join some other system of social networking.

Try doing that to democracy. You can't unsubscribe. You are automatically in for life, and not even changing your location or moving out of the country changes that. It is even extremely hard to delete your account by renouncing your citizenship. The leaders of the democracy will still hound you.

We can learn from Facebook and all other social networks that the Internet has brought us. These are more than websites; they are models of social organization that transcend old forms. Make the rest of life more like a social network and we will begin to see real progress in the course of civilization. Persist in the old model of forced democratic community and we will continue to see decline.

Regards,

Jeffrey Tucker
Executive editor, Laissez Faire Books

Friday, June 3, 2011

THE PROBLEM WITH DEMOCRACY

by James Craig Green

Here and elsewhere, I have written about today's out-of-control government spending, public debt and the failure of Republicans, including their new brash-talking tea party congressmen, to do anything about it. The pathetic, anemic and trivial rhetoric coming from six months of a born-again Republican House of Representatives has resulted in no spending reductions of any kind, or even their prospect. In fact, the only member of Congress who I respect (Ron Paul) hit the nail on the head a while back when he said, Instead of the left agreeing to cut social spending and the right agreeing to cut military spending, the right agrees to more welfare and the left agrees to more warfare.

I have often pointed out the tragic conversion of America's federal government from a small republic limited by the U.S. Constitution to a few important tasks, into a massive, bloated behemoth that, along with its Frankenstein Monster the Fed - has accomplished unlimited government spending for anything and everything imaginable. As I described in PRIVATE PROPERTY PUBLIC PLUNDER and my Unchain the Builders series article on JAMES MADISON, America has unfortunately become much more democratic, and less republican, than the American founders intended.

I should point out the obvious, but so many refuse to see: today's so-called republicanism has almost nothing in common with the republicanism of America's founding. If it were not for current Republicans' empty rhetoric which never translates into meaningful, government-limiting results, there would be no connection at all.

Also, as I described in MARKETS WORK-GOVERNMENTS DON'TCRONY CAPITALISM and SOLAR JOBS, government today almost always does more harm than good when it gets involved in the economy. This is because it only knows how to used its oppressive tools: the sledgehammers of unconstitutional law, promotion of coercive monopolies and forced wealth transfer.

The American Republic's founders thought they made sure the new federal government being considered from 1787 to 1791 would be able to avoid the michiefs of faction described by James Madison in FEDERALIST NO. 10. They were wrong.

I can think of no better analogy to illustrate the silliness of democracy than a family operating under democractic principles to show what is wrong with America today, and why.

KIND BUT MISGUIDED PARENTS

Imagine a fairly typical American family, with two working parents who bring in all the family's income, and their three young children who do not work. Suppose, in their zeal for democracy, unrestrained by any rule of law, much less a Constitution, these compassionate parents decide to implement pure democracy in their family.

All it takes is a simple rule: every dollar spent by the family will be based on a majority vote of all five members. So, if the parents want to make a house payment but the kids want to go to Disneyland, the house payment does not get made. The kids are so happy about the trip, they next vote for anything and everything they want, realizing their parents will have to comply, by the parents' own chosen rules.

At this point, you might consider this the stupidest thing that any group of adults ever did, but you would be wrong. As P.J. O'Rourke once opined, Giving Congress the power to tax is like giving teenage boys whiskey and car keys.

Well, America, you have not only done just that, but much, much worse. You have given your immature children (voters, looking for "free" benefits at the expense of others) not only whiskey and car keys, but a printing press with which to make unlimited amounts of money (The Federal Reserve) without increased production of goods and services. All this from the insane idea that unbacked paper money, and not real goods and services, represents wealth. If the Fed really improved the economy, then everyone should be allowed to have a money-printing press in his basement, and the illusion that counterfeiting is illegal could be done away with once and for all.

And, as if this weren't enough, you've given these immature, reality-challenged voters the idea that they have a right to continue their high-on-the-hog lifestyle, regardless of cost or damage to others. Of course, it is easy to see how quickly any family who would be so foolish to live under pure democracy would quickly be bankrupt, or worse. But, like the childish members of public employee unions who believe they haven't gotten enough from taxpayers already, they also want the right to force more, and more, and more money from those who actually produce the useful goods and services they consume at the expense of more productive enterprises. As Mel Brooks said in the movie Blazing Saddles: We've got to protect our phony-baloney jobs, gentlemen.

You might think I chose the two working parents and three nonworking kids by chance, but it is actually a pretty good representation of America today, as shown in my recent post WHO BENEFITS AND WHO PAYS FOR GOVERNMENT?. Sixty percent (three out of five) of Americans receive more from government than they pay in, and only 40% (two out of five) pay more than they receive. A democratic America is already here.

The excesses of democracy, frequently called mob rule by American Founders, clearly manifested themselves in differences between the American and French Revolutions. Whereas the constrained republicanism of the American Revolution produced the Declaration of Independence, the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights, the almost purely democratic French Revolution a few years later produced the Reign of Terror, the Guillotine and eventually, the Emperor Napoleon.

Today's America resembles more closely the democratic excesses of the early French democracy, than the constitutional republic created by America's founders.

Several famous people have characterized the damage done by democracy:

  • Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself - John Adams
  • Democracy means simply the bludgeoning of the people by the people for the people - Oscar Wilde 
  • A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine. - Thomas Jefferson
As with the French Revolution, too much democracy, as evidenced by unfunded U.S. government liabilities estimated by the Cato Institute to be between 45 and 100 TRILLION DOLLARS (Table 1 on Page 7), cannot be continued without severe additional damage to the American economy.

If Americans don't soon get their government addiction under control; foreign bankers, bond markets and more economic collapses will.